|
FEMALES AND WELFARE
by Betsy Warrior (undated but probably
early 1970's)
(Editors Note: This pamphlet outlines a feminist strategy for welfare
mothers
struggling
to
change
the
welfare system)
There are 35 million poor people in this country. A THIRD OF THE POOR
LIVE IN FAMILIES HEADED BY FEMALES. Many of these families are on welfare,
and more should be getting some kind of welfare supplement added to
their income. Many of us think that in the richest nation in the world
there should be no poor people at all, and that the political and economic
reasons for their existence must come to an end.
Why were the welfare mothers picked by radical organizers to disrupt
the political system, with the economic breakdown on a local level,
and the change in the whole political structure that their demands
might bring?
Since five million of the poor are aged, it isn't likely that these
older people would start an active fight against the system that
kept them in poverty. Old people are more conservative and lack
the energy
and determination for a prolonged fight. But other families, a
lot of them headed by males -- why don't they fight the system that
made
them poor? They could fight for an adequate income.
What are the special qualities welfare mothers possess, to make
them the ones chosen to fight the establishment? The basic reason
is mothers
will fight for their children, to supply their needs, and they
will struggle for as long as it takes for their children to grow
up. They
possess both will and sustained determination to demand long
and loud that the political structure allow their children enough to
live on
decently, and in doing so change the political. structure.
The fact that most of the families on welfare are headed by females
says just as much about the status of females in this country
as it does about the political economy. Females in this country
are
too often
dependent on someone else for their livelihood. Many lack an
education good enough to allow them to support a family by
themselves; or
if they have an adequate education, they don't have the time
or energy
left after the duties of motherhood, household drudgery and
menial tasks, to use it. Women have a status as dependent human beings
in this country that doesn't change, whether it's one man or
the state
that allows them money to live on.
Bringing welfare mothers together to fight for themselves has
many positive aspects. It helps them to see their situation
isn't caused
by personal inadequacy, but the fault of a bad economic system.
They find more can be achieved by speaking out and joining
together to
fight the welfare department than by remaining quiet and
alone, or trying
to hide the fact that they're on welfare. Of course, this
only applies to the women who can be encouraged to join the welfare
groups.
There are many who are too defeated and afraid to even try
to help themselves,
these women are even more in need of incentive and help.
The females in the group can become more politically aware
of how their live's are run by city hall and demystify
the local
bureaucracy
for
themselves. By alleviating some of their more pressing
material needs it might give them and their children more energy and
hope to tackle
some of the many other problems they have as females and
human beings.
But the great majority of welfare mothers do not realize
what long range effects their actions will have on the
system. They're
being
used as political fodder by men who want the system changed
for themselves, and any benefits the mothers receive
in the process
are purely coincidental
or, material.
The welfare mothers run the risk of becoming as competitive,
aggressive and power-hungry as the males who oppress
them. 'This is because
their groups are being patterned after the structure
of male organizations, by male organizers, establishing
a
context
of leaders and followers,
encouraging competition for recognition and power between
the women in the groups.
Though the mothers may change their material and political
position, they won't be free until they identify
their oppression as being
inherent in the role they play as females, and abolish
that role. Without consciousness
of their inferior status as women they will remain
the victims of society and merely tools of the people
who
wish to use
their dissatisfaction to break the system.
Whether the money a mother receives is doled out
by a husband or a paternalistic welfare department
makes
little
difference.
Both
are
degrading, and many women prefer welfare to a husband.
It is her position as a dependent female in relationships
to
males
that is
at the root
of her problem.
For instance, if an active welfare mother gets
married, her husband usually doesn't let her
continue her
work in the
group. It is
time-consuming and he wants all her time spent
on him, being his house slave.
So her experience that could be very valuable
to other members of the
group
is wasted, and her relative independence is ended.
It is common practice for the male directors
and superintendents of welfare to use the female
clerks
and secretaries
as flunkies to transmit
their refusals of help and threats to the welfare
mothers, while they remain protected behind
locked doors. Although
most of the
social workers
are female, men have a monopoly on the positions
of power in the welfare system. The social
workers carry
out their
decisions
and
receive the
scorn and abuse of the mothers. This confuses
the mothers as to who the real enemy is. The
women
who work in
the welfare department are
poorly paid and overworked, not much better
off than the welfare
mothers, but they are set one against the other.
Until they can see each other
as sisters in oppression and start liberating
themselves as females, they might succeed in
changing the
system, but others
(men) will
benefit more by their success. Though the mothers
will be the ones
to bear
the brunt of reaction and risk what little
they have....
|
